<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1968 (10) TMI 47 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41332</link>
    <description>&quot;Baggage&quot; under the Customs Act has its ordinary wide meaning and is not confined to bona fide baggage or personal effects; it can include merchandise carried in a passenger&#039;s luggage, so detained diamonds could fall within Section 80. Goods declared and detained under that provision are not treated as imported or attempted to be imported for confiscation purposes, so seizure on that basis was not justified. Once detention is accepted, the proper officer cannot later revoke it and withhold the goods; they must be returned when the passenger leaves India. Availability of statutory appeal and revision did not bar writ relief on the facts, and the petition was maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Oct 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Jun 2010 11:15:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=79863" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (10) TMI 47 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41332</link>
      <description>&quot;Baggage&quot; under the Customs Act has its ordinary wide meaning and is not confined to bona fide baggage or personal effects; it can include merchandise carried in a passenger&#039;s luggage, so detained diamonds could fall within Section 80. Goods declared and detained under that provision are not treated as imported or attempted to be imported for confiscation purposes, so seizure on that basis was not justified. Once detention is accepted, the proper officer cannot later revoke it and withhold the goods; they must be returned when the passenger leaves India. Availability of statutory appeal and revision did not bar writ relief on the facts, and the petition was maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Oct 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41332</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>